Detroit — General Motors Co. CEO Dan Akerson wants the federal gas tax boosted as much as $1 a gallon to nudge consumers toward more fuel-efficient cars, and he's confident the government will soon shed its remaining 26 percent stake in the once-bankrupt automaker.

"I actually think the government will be out this year — within the next 12 months, hopefully within the next six months," Akerson said in a two-hour interview with The Detroit News last week.

He is grateful for the government's rescue of GM — "I have nothing but good things to say about them" — but Akerson said the time for that relationship to end is coming because it's wearing on GM.

"It's kind of like your in-laws: It was a nice long weekend. We didn't say a week," Akerson said with a laugh.

And while he is eager to say goodbye to the government as a part owner of GM, Akerson would like to see it step up to the challenge of setting a higher gas tax, as part of a comprehensive energy policy.

A government-imposed tax hike, Akerson believes, will prompt more people to buy small cars and do more good for the environment than forcing automakers to comply with higher gas-mileage standards.

"There ought to be a discussion on the cost versus the benefits," he said. "What we are going to do is tax production here, and that will cost us jobs."

For the years 2017-25, federal officials are considering 3 percent to 6 percent annual fuel efficiency increases, or 47 mpg to 62 mpg. That could boost the cost of vehicles by up to $3,500.

"You know what I'd rather have them do — this will make my Republican friends puke — as gas is going to go down here now, we ought to just slap a 50-cent or a dollar tax on a gallon of gas," Akerson said.

"People will start buying more Cruzes and they will start buying less Suburbans."

With gas already over $4 a gallon in parts of the country, a higher gas tax is a hard sell.

Rebecca Lindland, an analyst with IHS Global Insight, said higher gas taxes in Europe did lead consumers to buy more fuel-efficient cars.

But she acknowledged that's virtually impossible to see in the United States.

"It's career suicide for a politician to call for raising gas taxes," Lindland said.

Akerson isn't the first auto exec to float the idea of a gas tax to encourage consumers to buy fuel-efficient vehicles. Ford Chairman Bill Ford Jr. has previously advocated a gas tax increase.

On Monday, a Ford spokeswoman said the company "will leave the policy decision to Congress"; in 2009, GM CEO Rick Wagoner called a higher gas tax "worthy of consideration."

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110607/AUTO01/106070368/GM-chief-pushing-for-higher-gas-taxes#ixzz1Ob1gHNI0

BucEyedPea

06-07-2011, 08:35 AM

Nice way to use govt to create a market for oneself. This is the politicians job for the purpose of dealing with a govt budget. Sounds like GM can't sell it's cars in the market without govt force.

ChiTown

06-07-2011, 08:37 AM

:facepalm:

blaise

06-07-2011, 08:54 AM

Maybe bicycle and bus manufacturers should ask for higher sales taxes on automobiles.

LOCOChief

06-07-2011, 09:00 AM

Hell GM and akerson have nothing to worry about, that's Obama's dog in the hunt. Same thing with the big banks who received TARP, it's the little ones who didn't need the help that need to worry.

I've owned a shit load of nothing but Chevy trucks all my life.

Never again!

Chevy trucks are the biggest piece of shit on the road. Every other chevy pickup you see has a headlamp out. they can't even figure that shit out.

go fuck yourself GM and akerson!

Deberg_1990

06-07-2011, 09:01 AM

Why would he want to sell more small cars? I thought profit margins were higher on the trucks and SUV's?

mnchiefsguy

06-07-2011, 09:01 AM

Maybe this asshat needs to develop a car that runs on something other gasoline. Liberal elitist prick.

HonestChieffan

06-07-2011, 09:19 AM

Maybe we should tax gas guzzlers...you know, like the shit he is trying to sell.....wait that would be a bad tax. Good is taxing others. Bad is taxing self.

blaise

06-07-2011, 09:47 AM

Why would he want to sell more small cars? I thought profit margins were higher on the trucks and SUV's?

I bet the margins on the hybrids are large.

HonestChieffan

06-07-2011, 09:49 AM

I bet the margins on the hybrids are large.

Not close to PU's and SUVs

Brock

06-07-2011, 09:58 AM

They should have let this company die.

Donger

06-07-2011, 10:13 AM

That seems odd. If the goal is to have Americans move toward more fuel-efficient vehicles, perhaps GM should should stop building vehicles that aren't fuel-efficient.

ChiTown

06-07-2011, 10:14 AM

They should have let this company die.

This

F Government Motors

Simplex3

06-07-2011, 10:16 AM

Why would he want to sell more small cars? I thought profit margins were higher on the trucks and SUV's?

The margins on small cars and hybrids are lower than SUVs because the average American has been buying giant SUVs (the demand side of the equation). I would bet the fuel standards laws are kicking GM in the balls, though, because they can't get people to buy their small cars, mostly because they're raging shit boxes.

GM would like for the government to force everyone who has bought a giant GM gas guzzler to now need to turn around and buy something that gets better mileage. Making gas prohibitively expensive works to that end. My guess is GM's plan is to get people to re-buy their Suburban for the newer, hybrid model Suburban.

DJ's left nut

06-07-2011, 10:22 AM

Hell GM and akerson have nothing to worry about, that's Obama's dog in the hunt. Same thing with the big banks who received TARP, it's the little ones who didn't need the help that need to worry.

I've owned a shit load of nothing but Chevy trucks all my life.

Never again!

Chevy trucks are the biggest piece of shit on the road. Every other chevy pickup you see has a headlamp out. they can't even figure that shit out.

go fuck yourself GM and akerson!

I'm not sure I've seen a Chevy truck in the last 5 years that had both daytime running lights operational.

The margins on small cars and hybrids are lower than SUVs because the average American has been buying giant SUVs (the demand side of the equation). I would bet the fuel standards laws are kicking GM in the balls, though, because they can't get people to buy their small cars, mostly because they're raging shit boxes.

GM would like for the government to force everyone who has bought a giant GM gas guzzler to now need to turn around and buy something that gets better mileage. Making gas prohibitively expensive works to that end. My guess is GM's plan is to get people to re-buy their Suburban for the newer, hybrid model Suburban.

Yeah, that sounds about right. Just amazing arrogance by a company that learned nothing by its failures over the last few years. As far as GM's concerned, it really is impossible for them to fail at this point. The government will save them.

So they'll continue to build shitty little cars and hope the government saves them again. Nah, nobody saw this coming or anything.

I grew up with Chevy. I have my '67 Camaro but since it was made back when they gave a damn, it's grandfathered in. Apart from that, I'll never own another Chevy. My sedans will be foreign and my trucks will be Ford.

Nicely done, GM, very nicely done.

PhillyChiefFan

06-07-2011, 10:23 AM

Either buy a brand new car OR we'll jack up the cost of gasoline so you can't afford to drive the car that you have...your choice America!

Good example of how out of touch politicians/CEO's are.

Wonder what this guys bonus is going to be this year?

RedNeckRaider

06-07-2011, 10:31 AM

They should have let this company die.

Agreed~

Deberg_1990

06-07-2011, 11:01 AM

heh, i love this part..as if we actually had a say in the matter. ROFL

GM was saved, he said, because of the extreme generosity of Americans — a spirit that helped restore Europe and Japan after World War II and rebuild cities such as New Orleans after natural disasters.

"We're the most generous country, even in terrible times," Akerson said. "We don't walk to the disaster as a nation. … We can't wait to help."

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110607/AUTO01/106070368/GM-chief-pushing-for-higher-gas-taxes#ixzz1Obezz25x

Brock

06-07-2011, 11:03 AM

It takes a lot of gall to compare corporate looting to a war or a natural disaster. Help! Save us! We need more taxpayer money to steal!

blaise

06-07-2011, 11:08 AM

It takes a lot of gall to compare corporate looting to a war or a natural disaster. Help! Save us! We need more taxpayer money to steal!

Thinking they could sell people on Cavaliers and Sunfires vs Corollas and Luminas vs Camrys was the disaster.

mlyonsd

06-07-2011, 11:10 AM

heh, i love this part..as if we actually had a say in the matter. ROFL

GM was saved, he said, because of the extreme generosity of Americans — a spirit that helped restore Europe and Japan after World War II and rebuild cities such as New Orleans after natural disasters.

"We're the most generous country, even in terrible times," Akerson said. "We don't walk to the disaster as a nation. … We can't wait to help."

Now it's time to bend 'em over with higher gas taxes so they're forced to buy new technology.

petegz28

06-07-2011, 02:38 PM

I am getting ready to buy a new car and am breaking tradition from my personal "buy American" philo......I have looked at 4 cars so far, the Sonata, the Maxima, the Optima and Fusion.....

The Sonata was impressive for the price...
The Optima was even more so ...
The Maxima while costlier was the best...

I sat in the Fusion for all of 2 seconds and said "this is a cheap piece of shit"

You can see the quality difference instantly. The Fusion just came across as cheaply put together, old style junk. Sorry to any of you who own a Fusion and like it.

What I saw after all was said and done was quality vs. gimmick. Yes, the Fusion had a lot of the bells and whistles but the craftsmanship looked cheap, the style was boring as all hell and price-wise it just couldn't hold water to the others.

When my Wife asked why I thought the Ford looked so different I had one word, "Unions". What the others give you in features they also give you in quality. The Ford seemed like they took the cheap route to compete and I wonder why they can't afford the same quality at the same price?

Simplex3

06-07-2011, 04:04 PM

I agree that American car companies sell on features, as if cars are disposable. Feature for feature I paid a bit more for my Civic than I would have for a similarly sized American car, but when you check the number of Civics still on the road vs. their American counterparts it's a joke.

Specifically on the Fusion, just think: That's the best of the breed from the American companies. It goes downhill from there.

mlyonsd

06-07-2011, 06:22 PM

Bleh, I own 4 GM's and one Chrysler. Only one has less than 100,000 miles on it. The Bonneville has 202,000.

I'd put my cost of ownership up against anybody else's.

CrazyPhuD

06-07-2011, 06:30 PM

Heh someone posted this before on FB so I'll post my response up here(because I'm lazy!) with a couple caveats.

Heh you know I was going to make a joke about how poor the fake electric car volt sales are but I actually agree 1000% with his comments. CAFE rules are flat out ruining the automotive enthusiast industry. You're dumping fun interesting sports cars for boring bland economy vehicles because they can't meet fleet standards. You lose things like V8s and replace them with turbos meh... The only bonus is reduced vehicle weight.

If you want to encourage people's behavior consumption based taxes are the right way to do. It allows the market to then decide which vehicles survive. Instead of vehicles never existing because they can't meet fleet economy rules. Plus you then have consumption based taxes to fund public transit initiatives rather than general taxes. If you want to change people's habits and behaviors go to more European style gas taxes. But the politicians don't have the political will to do the right then so they 'regulate' us to death and most people don't understand what they are truly missing because it never gets produced.

The major issue with consumption based taxes is trying to limit the negative impact on the middle/low incomes, but really we should be phasing in a much higher gas tax if we want to discourage consumption. Every attempt to reduce consumption of gas has consistently failed. Even hybrids have limited impact, one result they found was that as people got better mileage they just drove more. The only solution that has proven to work is price.

But if the government insists on CAFE requirement then they need to apply them equally which means NO different requirements for trucks and SUVs all vehicles MUST meet the same standards. After all you can buy plenty of used cars with great mileage. But if you insist on carting yourself around in an SUV that gets 10 miles to the gallon you have no right to complain about the price of gas.....

CoMoChief

06-07-2011, 07:41 PM

This has got to stop, folks.

People need to start distancing themselves from both the dem and rep parties, because they're all one of the same and nothing is going to change unless people start waking up and realizing that.

DJ's left nut

06-08-2011, 01:05 PM

I am getting ready to buy a new car and am breaking tradition from my personal "buy American" philo......I have looked at 4 cars so far, the Sonata, the Maxima, the Optima and Fusion.....

The Sonata was impressive for the price...
The Optima was even more so ...
The Maxima while costlier was the best...

I sat in the Fusion for all of 2 seconds and said "this is a cheap piece of shit"

You can see the quality difference instantly. The Fusion just came across as cheaply put together, old style junk. Sorry to any of you who own a Fusion and like it.

What I saw after all was said and done was quality vs. gimmick. Yes, the Fusion had a lot of the bells and whistles but the craftsmanship looked cheap, the style was boring as all hell and price-wise it just couldn't hold water to the others.

When my Wife asked why I thought the Ford looked so different I had one word, "Unions". What the others give you in features they also give you in quality. The Ford seemed like they took the cheap route to compete and I wonder why they can't afford the same quality at the same price?

I recently ran the same little gamut and came away with a Sonata that had every bell and whistle on it. That car is fun as all hell to drive (275 horses in a car that is very very light), it's built well and it came in around 27K. When I drove it, then the Maxima (which I planned on buying going in), I was shocked by how plain the Max was. The interior was uninspired. While the performance was solid, you paid for it with the relatively putrid mileage you got.

Kia's build quality just wasn't up to par, IMO.

If you're looking to spend in the mid-upper 20s, make sure you take one of the loaded 2.0T Sonata's for a spin before you decide. It's an easy decision at that point, IMO.

Brock

06-08-2011, 01:15 PM

The snotta appears to be a great car. Everybody I've ever talked to about them loves it.

Saul Good

06-08-2011, 01:29 PM

I recently ran the same little gamut and came away with a Sonata that had every bell and whistle on it. That car is fun as all hell to drive (275 horses in a car that is very very light), it's built well and it came in around 27K. When I drove it, then the Maxima (which I planned on buying going in), I was shocked by how plain the Max was. The interior was uninspired. While the performance was solid, you paid for it with the relatively putrid mileage you got.

Kia's build quality just wasn't up to par, IMO.

If you're looking to spend in the mid-upper 20s, make sure you take one of the loaded 2.0T Sonata's for a spin before you decide. It's an easy decision at that point, IMO.

I had a similar conversation this weekend with a friend of mine who drives a Lexus GS350. He basically came to the conclusion that the Sonata is a good car, but he couldn't feel cool telling everyone, "I bought a Sonata. They've really come a long way."

DJ's left nut

06-08-2011, 03:32 PM

I had a similar conversation this weekend with a friend of mine who drives a Lexus GS350. He basically came to the conclusion that the Sonata is a good car, but he couldn't feel cool telling everyone, "I bought a Sonata. They've really come a long way."

Yup, exact same thing I went through. I was getting me 'pre-partner' car from my employer and was told to go see what I wanted. I started looking at the standard 3-series, LS series, etc... stuff but I was going to have to come out of pocket some for them. Then I went to the Chicago auto show where all of them were side by side and the Sonata easily went toe to toe with them in the styling and comfort department. Then when I went test driving, it equaled or exceeded anything I drove.

It just isn't a 'cool' thing to drive. That said, I've been really surprised by how many compliments I get on that car. I've had 4 or 5 people, a couple of whom I'd never met, ask me about the car out of the blue. I've loaned it to a couple people just to go run an quick errand or something and they've both come back, flipped the keys to me and said something like 'damn nice car'...

It doesn't have name cache, but in motion or even sitting still, people have been impressed by it. I never expected to buy one, let alone have people be legitimately impressed by it, yet both have happened.

RedNeckRaider

06-08-2011, 03:41 PM

I had a similar conversation this weekend with a friend of mine who drives a Lexus GS350. He basically came to the conclusion that the Sonata is a good car, but he couldn't feel cool telling everyone, "I bought a Sonata. They've really come a long way."

LMAO needing a cool car to be cool~

CrazyPhuD

06-08-2011, 04:52 PM

I recently ran the same little gamut and came away with a Sonata that had every bell and whistle on it. That car is fun as all hell to drive (275 horses in a car that is very very light), it's built well and it came in around 27K. When I drove it, then the Maxima (which I planned on buying going in), I was shocked by how plain the Max was. The interior was uninspired. While the performance was solid, you paid for it with the relatively putrid mileage you got.

Kia's build quality just wasn't up to par, IMO.

If you're looking to spend in the mid-upper 20s, make sure you take one of the loaded 2.0T Sonata's for a spin before you decide. It's an easy decision at that point, IMO.

Hyundai has been putting out some pretty good cars as of late. But I do have to chuckle a bit at how our perspectives have changed when a 3400lb car is considered very light. To me that's still heavy! A light car is sub 3000lbs and a very light car would be closer to 2000lbs! That's probably the only thing I like about the CAFE requirements...they are pushing hard at lower weight. BUT that would have happened anyway with the higher gas prices!

DJ's left nut

06-08-2011, 05:06 PM

Hyundai has been putting out some pretty good cars as of late. But I do have to chuckle a bit at how our perspectives have changed when a 3400lb car is considered very light. To me that's still heavy! A light car is sub 3000lbs and a very light car would be closer to 2000lbs! That's probably the only thing I like about the CAFE requirements...they are pushing hard at lower weight. BUT that would have happened anyway with the higher gas prices!

The curb weight checks in at just a hair over 3100 lbs, I believe. For a modern 4-door sedan, that's pretty damn light.

Remember - those late 70s Accords that checked in at 2k were also roadkill if hit. Safety standards have mandated much more in the way of support structures that have added to the weight. So were the other 'ultralight' sedans. And you can still get some of those today (the Elantra, Corolla, etc...), but they're not really 'family sedans' as much as they're small 4-doors.

Yeah, I call it very light, but I mean in relation to its peers more than anything. For its segment, the Sonata is damn near a featherweight.

CrazyPhuD

06-08-2011, 05:22 PM

The curb weight checks in at just a hair over 3100 lbs, I believe. For a modern 4-door sedan, that's pretty damn light.

Remember - those late 70s Accords that checked in at 2k were also roadkill if hit. Safety standards have mandated much more in the way of support structures that have added to the weight. So were the other 'ultralight' sedans. And you can still get some of those today (the Elantra, Corolla, etc...), but they're not really 'family sedans' as much as they're small 4-doors.

Yeah, I call it very light, but I mean in relation to its peers more than anything. For its segment, the Sonata is damn near a featherweight.

I was curious before when I checked the Hyundai site, the 2.4 NA versions is 3100ish....the 2.0T(which is 274) is 3350-3450, not bad but I believe is relatively par for the course with compacts now...they are 3500ish. It's not bad at all but still funny what we call light now.

Still the only reason you had massive weight bloat for 'safety' is because you had 6kLB SUVs driving around. Ratchet up gas prices and those disappear. When they disappear the safety 'requirements' go down because there are fewer heavy cars on the road to cause accidents with that level of force. Physics 101 the amount of energy and object has(that can be transferred to you) is KE=1/2*m * v^2. Drop the mass and you lower the energy significantly. Then again drop the speed and you lower the energy even more.

Still if you want to feel fast it's all about perception. TQ to weight is probably more important than HP to weight and you'd want a 'kick' so you feel the difference more. My current setup actually doesn't 'feel' as obviously fast as stock even though I'm > 300HP in a <2800lb car(versus ~250 stock). Reason why is the power is super linear, it just builds and build as the revs rise, torque curve is fairly flat so there is no kick to make you feel like it's going faster.

DJ's left nut

06-08-2011, 05:29 PM

I was curious before when I checked the Hyundai site, the 2.4 NA versions is 3100ish....the 2.0T(which is 274) is 3350-3450, not bad but I believe is relatively par for the course with compacts now...they are 3500ish. It's not bad at all but still funny what we call light now.

Still the only reason you had massive weight bloat for 'safety' is because you had 6kLB SUVs driving around. Ratchet up gas prices and those disappear. When they disappear the safety 'requirements' go down because there are fewer heavy cars on the road to cause accidents with that level of force. Physics 101 the amount of energy and object has(that can be transferred to you) is KE=1/2*m * v^2. Drop the mass and you lower the energy significantly. Then again drop the speed and you lower the energy even more.

Still if you want to feel fast it's all about perception. TQ to weight is probably more important than HP to weight and you'd want a 'kick' so you feel the difference more. My current setup actually doesn't 'feel' as obviously fast as stock even though I'm > 300HP in a <2800lb car(versus ~250 stock). Reason why is the power is super linear, it just builds and build as the revs rise, torque curve is fairly flat so there is no kick to make you feel like it's going faster.

If 'those' disappear, it takes me two trips to get my 3 labradors, wife and (eventual) children to Kansas City for Christmas (and probably 3 trips to get it all back). It makes the camping trip I'm going on this weekend (where we're car-pooling 5 guys and their gear) essentially impossible.

In short - it's more government dictating my behavior 'for my own good'... Those big SUVs aren't mere status symbols for most people driving them - they're also very very useful.

As to the 'fast' line - no doubt. More critical than power to weight, is the application of the power. My full 275 doesn't come in until around 5-6K RPMs. So off the line, the car doesn't feel spectacular. At highway speeds where I need a passing gear, OTOH, it almost put me in the back seat. The '67, OTOH, will absolutely terrify me off the line; it's nothing but raw displacement and a quick rear end at work. On the other hand, it feels a little doggy when I try to get into it above 70 (though that may just be a bad shift point...stupid wife and her demand for an automatic).

Speed is about more than power, TQ and weight, to be sure.

petegz28

06-08-2011, 09:42 PM

Yup, exact same thing I went through. I was getting me 'pre-partner' car from my employer and was told to go see what I wanted. I started looking at the standard 3-series, LS series, etc... stuff but I was going to have to come out of pocket some for them. Then I went to the Chicago auto show where all of them were side by side and the Sonata easily went toe to toe with them in the styling and comfort department. Then when I went test driving, it equaled or exceeded anything I drove.

It just isn't a 'cool' thing to drive. That said, I've been really surprised by how many compliments I get on that car. I've had 4 or 5 people, a couple of whom I'd never met, ask me about the car out of the blue. I've loaned it to a couple people just to go run an quick errand or something and they've both come back, flipped the keys to me and said something like 'damn nice car'...

It doesn't have name cache, but in motion or even sitting still, people have been impressed by it. I never expected to buy one, let alone have people be legitimately impressed by it, yet both have happened.

I'm just not thrilled on the body style. Not saying it is ugly, just not appealing to me. I own a Maxima now as well so I am a little biased. It has been a damn good car too. We have a Hyundai Santa Fe and it has been good as well. Just the Sonata is a little too boxy looking for me. And I am not sold on the Turbo vs. a V6 yet either. I did like the amount of trunk space though, much bigger than anything else out there but it was the weakest on torque compared to the other ones which again, makes me nervous about a 4 cyl turbo